Lens question

Bob Larter <bobbylar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> John Navas wrote:
> > On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:11:24 -0000, "No spam please"
> [...]
> >> I have no problems using any Canon EF lens on any EF body.
>
> > You've defining the problem away, and in fact some Canon EF lenses won't
> > work on some Canon EF bodies.
>
> Really? That's news to me. Which lenses, & which bodies?

The EF-S lenses won't work on full frame EOS bodies ... but that's
because its an EF-S lens, which is not an EF lens, but rather a lens
that's designed to be used on EF-S based EOS bodies, which are
compatible with both EF & EF-S lenses.


-hh

-hh

John Navas wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:11:24 -0000, "No spam please"
[...]
>> I have no problems using any Canon EF lens on any EF body.
>
> You've defining the problem away, and in fact some Canon EF lenses won't
> work on some Canon EF bodies.

Really? That's news to me. Which lenses, & which bodies?


--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Bob Larter

No spam please wrote:
> "Bob Larter" <> wrote in message
> news:4aed24d3$...
>> PaddleHard wrote:
>>> I have a question about lenses, Canon in particular. I have a Digital
>>> Rebel 300D and am looking to purchase a 50D in the next year. I'm
>>> looking at a EF 28-135mm IS USM lense. Will this work with both
>>> cameras?
>> Yep.
>>
>>> What's the rule of thumb for Canon lenses and their
>>> 'compatibility' with older and new cameras?
>> Any EF (not EFS) lens should work fine on any Canon DSLR.
>>
>> --
>> W
>
> I believe it is also true that any EF lens should work on any Canon EF mount
> body including their 35mm and APS bodies.

No doubt. I was assuming that because the OP asked the question here,
they were interested in DSLRs specifically.

> Before you ask - not all airlines permit digital cameras to be used during
> flight and many prohibit them during the take-off and landing phases of the
> flight. I fly with an airline that has a total ban on digital equipment.
> It's a good airline (usually on time, plenty of leg room and so on) so I'm
> happy to use a film body.

You know that all the Canon EF film bodies also have digital electronics
in them? Strictly speaking, they should ban EF film bodies as well. ;^)

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Bob Larter

In article <>, Neil
Harrington <> wrote:

> Rog, I knew about cell phones, because my sister -- who flies quite a lot,
> including internationally -- had told me they couldn't be used during
> takeoff or landing (or in flight either, if I understood her correctly). She
> mentioned that often after landing, as soon as the seat belts light went out
> you could hear cell phones snapping open all over the cabin.

many airlines now allow cellphone use while taxiing to the gate after
landing.

> (*She* could
> hear that I suppose, but I never did, probably because my hearing is very
> poor.) I can understand prohibiting the use of cell phones. And I can
> understand prohibiting the use of laptops too, since probably most of them
> now in use have WiFi.

laptops are fine, especially with inflight wifi, however, voip apps are
banned. a couple of airlines have considered inflight cellphones using
a picocell on the plane.

> But I'd be surprised if "digital equipment" was taken to include cameras,
> for this purpose, since as far as I know they don't generate any sort of
> external RF.

it's *extremely* small.

nospam

In article <5CuHm.51192$PH1.1085@edtnps82>, Dudley Hanks
<> wrote:

> I don't know if all airlines have adopted these practices, but I wouldn't be
> surprised.

you aren't supposed to use electronics during takeoff or landing, but
during cruise it's fine. some airlines prohibit photography of airline
staff but allow pics out the window or of people you're traveling with.


what i find amusing is that since there is now inflight wifi internet
for a fee, wireless transmitters are suddenly safe.

nospam

In article <>, Neil
Harrington <> wrote:

> I can't see how an ordinary digital camera could pose any sort of problem,
> unless it were one of the very few that have WiFi built in. I wonder how
> literally "all electronics" is taken. Surely they don't ban the use of
> digital watches or hearing aids, for example.

the rule is if it has an on/off switch, it must be off for takeoff and
landing. if there's no wifi on board, any device with wireless
functionality must have that feature disabled (e.g., airplane mode in a
cellphone).

nospam

"Neil Harrington" <> wrote in message
news: ...
>
> "nospam" <> wrote in message
> news:011120091453097799%...
>> In article <>, Neil
>> Harrington <> wrote:
>>
>>> > Before you ask - not all airlines permit digital cameras to be used
>>> > during
>>> > flight and many prohibit them during the take-off and landing phases
>>> > of
>>> > the flight. I fly with an airline that has a total ban on digital
>>> > equipment. It's a good airline (usually on time, plenty of leg room
>>> > and so
>>> > on) so I'm happy to use a film body.
>>>
>>> I never heard of such a ban. When I fly I always take a DSLR to take
>>> pictures in the airport (I love airports) and a digital compact to take
>>> pictures out the airliner window, and sometimes of the cockpit when the
>>> door
>>> is open. No one has ever objected yet.
>>
>> all airlines prohibit electronic devices during takeoff/landing, but
>> some go further than that. some airlines ban cd/dvd players (can't have
>> a laser!) or they require removable batteries to be removed and put in
>> checked luggage. so while it may be rare, i wouldn't rule it out.
>
> That's interesting. Continental -- and the smaller regional airline flying
> as Continental Express -- evidently couldn't care less. I'll be using a
> different airline this winter, so maybe it will be different.
>

During most flights I've been on, lately, the flight crew is mainly
concerned with electronic devices which utilize a transmitter.

For instance, my Trekker GPS device has the software running on an HP IPAQ,
which receives GPS info from a separate (bluetooth) GPS device, so I can't
use it during the flight.

But, I've had no objections to taking a few shots of Mich lying patiently,
or of scenic shots out the window.

But, during take-offs and landings, requests to turn off all electronics
still seem to be the norm.

I don't know if all airlines have adopted these practices, but I wouldn't be
surprised.

Take Care,
Dudley

Dudley Hanks

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 06:02:41 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
<> wrote:

>
>"Neil Harrington" <> wrote in message
>news: m...
>>
>> "nospam" <> wrote in message
>> news:011120091453097799%...
>>> In article <>, Neil
>>> Harrington <> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Before you ask - not all airlines permit digital cameras to be used
>>>> > during
>>>> > flight and many prohibit them during the take-off and landing phases
>>>> > of
>>>> > the flight. I fly with an airline that has a total ban on digital
>>>> > equipment. It's a good airline (usually on time, plenty of leg room
>>>> > and so
>>>> > on) so I'm happy to use a film body.
>>>>
>>>> I never heard of such a ban. When I fly I always take a DSLR to take
>>>> pictures in the airport (I love airports) and a digital compact to take
>>>> pictures out the airliner window, and sometimes of the cockpit when the
>>>> door
>>>> is open. No one has ever objected yet.
>>>
>>> all airlines prohibit electronic devices during takeoff/landing, but
>>> some go further than that. some airlines ban cd/dvd players (can't have
>>> a laser!) or they require removable batteries to be removed and put in
>>> checked luggage. so while it may be rare, i wouldn't rule it out.
>>
>> That's interesting. Continental -- and the smaller regional airline flying
>> as Continental Express -- evidently couldn't care less. I'll be using a
>> different airline this winter, so maybe it will be different.
>>
>
>During most flights I've been on, lately, the flight crew is mainly
>concerned with electronic devices which utilize a transmitter.
>
>For instance, my Trekker GPS device has the software running on an HP IPAQ,
>which receives GPS info from a separate (bluetooth) GPS device, so I can't
>use it during the flight.
>
>But, I've had no objections to taking a few shots of Mich lying patiently,
>or of scenic shots out the window.

You can't even properly frame nor see your dog that's laying right next to
your feet while sitting at a table in the mall. Even when you are using the
full-screen of a laptop as your viewfinder. Please explain to everyone how
you can compose (with intent) any scene out of a window?

Even more funny are your recent posts about photographing and driving cars.
I.e. Ford Exec says, "Let's humor the foolish blind man or we'll look bad
in PR. We'll just have a full safety-team stand by at thousands of dollars
of our cost so we don't look bad." Nothing like using your blindness to
manipulate all others to get what you want, eh? At everyone else's expense,
of course. Or using gels on flash units. As if that's ever going to help
with your compositions that you can't see nor focus on in the first place.

<major eye-roll>

Grow up, and ...

Ghett Rheel

Ghett Rheel

"nospam" <> wrote in message
news:021120090122566686%...
> In article <5CuHm.51192$PH1.1085@edtnps82>, Dudley Hanks
> <> wrote:
>
>> I don't know if all airlines have adopted these practices, but I wouldn't
>> be
>> surprised.
>
> you aren't supposed to use electronics during takeoff or landing, but
> during cruise it's fine. some airlines prohibit photography of airline
> staff but allow pics out the window or of people you're traveling with.
>
>
> what i find amusing is that since there is now inflight wifi internet
> for a fee, wireless transmitters are suddenly safe.

Isn't that the way it generally works? In the early days of commercial air
travel, bringing food on board was probably taboo -- at least until they
found a way to charge for it, or to work it into the price of the ticket...

Take Care,
Dudley

Dudley Hanks

"Ghett Rheel" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 06:02:41 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
> <> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Neil Harrington" <> wrote in message
>>news: om...
>>>
>>> "nospam" <> wrote in message
>>> news:011120091453097799%...
>>>> In article <>, Neil
>>>> Harrington <> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> > Before you ask - not all airlines permit digital cameras to be used
>>>>> > during
>>>>> > flight and many prohibit them during the take-off and landing phases
>>>>> > of
>>>>> > the flight. I fly with an airline that has a total ban on digital
>>>>> > equipment. It's a good airline (usually on time, plenty of leg room
>>>>> > and so
>>>>> > on) so I'm happy to use a film body.
>>>>>
>>>>> I never heard of such a ban. When I fly I always take a DSLR to take
>>>>> pictures in the airport (I love airports) and a digital compact to
>>>>> take
>>>>> pictures out the airliner window, and sometimes of the cockpit when
>>>>> the
>>>>> door
>>>>> is open. No one has ever objected yet.
>>>>
>>>> all airlines prohibit electronic devices during takeoff/landing, but
>>>> some go further than that. some airlines ban cd/dvd players (can't have
>>>> a laser!) or they require removable batteries to be removed and put in
>>>> checked luggage. so while it may be rare, i wouldn't rule it out.
>>>
>>> That's interesting. Continental -- and the smaller regional airline
>>> flying
>>> as Continental Express -- evidently couldn't care less. I'll be using a
>>> different airline this winter, so maybe it will be different.
>>>
>>
>>During most flights I've been on, lately, the flight crew is mainly
>>concerned with electronic devices which utilize a transmitter.
>>
>>For instance, my Trekker GPS device has the software running on an HP
>>IPAQ,
>>which receives GPS info from a separate (bluetooth) GPS device, so I can't
>>use it during the flight.
>>
>>But, I've had no objections to taking a few shots of Mich lying patiently,
>>or of scenic shots out the window.
>
> You can't even properly frame nor see your dog that's laying right next to
> your feet while sitting at a table in the mall. Even when you are using
> the
> full-screen of a laptop as your viewfinder. Please explain to everyone how
> you can compose (with intent) any scene out of a window?
>
> Even more funny are your recent posts about photographing and driving
> cars.
> I.e. Ford Exec says, "Let's humor the foolish blind man or we'll look bad
> in PR. We'll just have a full safety-team stand by at thousands of dollars
> of our cost so we don't look bad." Nothing like using your blindness to
> manipulate all others to get what you want, eh? At everyone else's
> expense,
> of course. Or using gels on flash units. As if that's ever going to help
> with your compositions that you can't see nor focus on in the first place.
>
> <major eye-roll>
>
> Grow up, and ...
>
> Ghett Rheel
>

Jealous?

You might be surprised at what is going to be posted on my site over the
next few months. Perhaps, once you realize that others can appreciate the
unusual and the unorthodox, you might get an inkling as to how limited is
your understanding of the human condition.

Perhaps one of your relatives told Hellen Keller she should just give up?

FYI, Ford's decision came after I provided company execs with detailed info
as to the demographics of my site visitors, and statistics about usage. I
provided a rather comprehensive summary of who visits my site, why they
visit it, and what they are looking for.

The interesting thing about the internet is that users are tired of the same
old, same old.

Why do you think traditional newspapers are dying? Television stations are
closing? And, why do you think that bazaar internet sites are flurishing?

If a web master can produce a product which connects to a definable
demographic, and if a more traditional company can use that connection to
highlight its products, its way of doing business and its corporate
philosophy, is it not good business for it to do exactly that?

Ford seems to think I'll make them more than I'll cost 'em.

Get Real, get with the times...

Take Care,
Dudley

Dudley Hanks